Upon nomination made by Senator Seum, and seconded by
Senator McGaha, Senator Higdon was nominated for the position of Senate
Co-chair.

Upon motion made by Senator McGaha, and seconded by Senator
Buford that nominations cease, Senator Higdon was elected Senate Co-chair by
acclamation, without objection.

Upon nomination made by Representative Combs, and seconded
by Representative Rand, Representative Steele was nominated for the position of
House Co-chair.

Upon motion made by Representative Simpson, and seconded by
Representative Combs that nominations cease, Representative Steele was elected
House Co-chair by acclamation, without objection.

Approve Minutes for March 19, 2012

Upon motion made by Representative Simpson and seconded by
Representative Mills, the minutes of the March 19, 2012 meeting were approved
by voice vote, without objection.

Senator Higdon recognized new committee members Senator Tom
Buford and Representative Jim DeCesare and noted that Senator Brandon Smith has
returned to the committee. He announced that the August meeting would be
Tuesday, August 14 at 10 am.

Follow-up on Impact Plus

Mr. Friedlander said that cabinet officials have been unable
to discuss the termination of a specified provider due to an ongoing
investigation. Because the Office of Attorney General will not be pursuing a
criminal or civil case related to this provider, the cabinet is able to provide
the memo distributed to committee members today. The memo describes a timeline
of events related to the termination. The cabinet has sent a letter inviting
the provider to join the cabinet in working through issues. The cabinet is
working to improve their review process. Impact Plus serves nearly 7,000
children with severe emotional disturbance.

Senator Higdon commented that the main goals are that
children are served and that taxpayers are protected. Based on his review of
the audits of existing providers, it does not appear that there were follow-ups
for providers with failing scores. Hopefully, the cabinet is looking at a new
review system. He summarized the results of some of the audits of providers,
including a 2009 audit that cited 47 deficiencies, a 2010 audit that cited 38
deficiencies, a 2011 audit that cited 62 deficiencies, a 2010 audit that cited
39 deficiencies, and a 2010 audit that cited 43 deficiencies. Roepke, a
provider that was terminated, was cited for 1,000 occurrences of no notes or
blank notes in 2008. Inappropriate billing continued according to a 2009 audit.
Roepke ended up owing the state $108,000. It was not noted anywhere whether a
recoupment had been received by the state. Senator Higdon asked what is being
done to address such concerns. Mr. Friedlander said that information will be
provided on what follow-up has occurred. How reviewing and scoring are done
need to be revisited.

In response to a question from Representative Steele, Mr.
Friedlander said that he would be willing to return to provide information related
to the Impact Plus provider that was terminated in 2011.

Representative Mills asked Mr. Friedlander to summarize the
document provided to committee members today. Mr. Friedlander said that it is a
timeline from the time the cabinet made contact with the provider. The document
reviews concerns related to overlapping billing.

In response to questions from Senator Buford, Ms. Dunnigan
said that Impact Plus would not be included in the renewed contract with
Eastern Kentucky University (EKU). Impact Plus program employees are now state
employees. The department has a contract with EKU for other staff positions
currently within the department that will be renewed for the upcoming year. The
amount of the renewed contract will be reported to the committee.

Senator Buford asked for examples of likely changes to the
Impact Plus program. Mr. Hall said that the scoring system for site reviews
would be revised. Ms. Dunnigan said that there may have been issues with one or
a few records from the sample used in the review. Mr. Friedlander said that the
department did not share the review tools with providers but will now do so.

Senator Buford asked if the contract awarded to EKU was put
out for bid. Ms. Dunnigan said that university contracts are not put out for
bidding. Clarifying her answer to an earlier question from Senator Buford, she explained
that four employees with EKU will be moved to state positions and will be paid
in the meantime through the larger contract with EKU.

In response to questions from Senator McGaha, Ms. Kelly said
there were four scoring categories. The average of the clinical and billing
scores should be above 85 percent or corrective actions are required.
Corrective action is also required if either the clinical or billing category
is below 80 percent. For the overall quality measurement, changes are
suggested, not required. The provider’s policy and procedures manual is also
reviewed.

Senator Smith said that administration of Impact Plus has
been one of his major concerns. In response to a question from Senator Smith,
Mr. Friedlander and Mr. Hall agreed that the cabinet could report on the status
of the termination case by the next Program Review meeting. Senator Higdon said
that this would be on the agenda for the next meeting.

Senator Higdon asked if there has been any consideration
given to providing Impact Plus services through managed care. This would give
Impact Plus subcontractors provider numbers and due process. Mr. Friedlander
said that he is not in a position to commit. Funding for Impact Plus is
complex, but consideration could be given to providing services through managed
care.

Representative DeCesare noted that some reviews are nearly 3
years old. In response to his question about scheduling of follow-ups, Ms.
Kelly said that reviews are ongoing.

Implementation of Senate Bill 1 (2009)

Commissioner Holliday noted that a presentation on SB 1 will
be on the agenda for the upcoming Southern Legislative Conference, which is an
indicator of other states’ interest in what Kentucky is doing. The first major
requirement of SB 1 is new, more rigorous academic standards aligned with the
entry requirements for college. Delivery strategies for the unified plan for
college and career readiness include persistence-to-graduate processes for all
students, alignment of courses and assessment, the Unbridled Learning
Accountability Model, targeted interventions for high school students who are
unprepared for the next step in learning, career readiness pathways,
acceleration programs (advanced placement), academic and career advising, and
priority schools. Double-digit gains in language arts and math have been
reported for all 41 priority (low-performing) schools. The Kentucky Board of
Education has established two goals related to college/career readiness: by
2015 increase the average freshman graduation rate from 76 percent to
90 percent and increase the percentage of students who are college or career
ready from 34 percent to 67 percent.

Kentucky worked with the national Common Core Standards
Initiative coalition to develop new standards. In February 2010, the Kentucky
Board of Education, Education Professional Standards Board (EPSB), and Council
of Postsecondary Education (CPE) adopted the new English/language arts and
mathematics standards, making Kentucky the first state to do so.

Ms. Smith said that the new standards are fewer in number
but require deeper understanding. The next-generation science standards are in
draft form and are due for release in spring 2013. New social studies standards
are being developed by a coalition of states and are due for release later in
2013. The common core academic standards in English/language arts and
mathematics were taught and assessed in the 2011-2012 school year. Regional
leadership networks are used to provide support and professional development
related to the new standards. The Continuous
Instructional Improvement Technology System uses resources developed by
Kentucky teachers focused on implementation of the standards. Implementation of
program reviews of components of the instructional program—required by
SB 1—began with the 2011-2012 school year. Implementation for the next
school year will incorporate more training for districts and schools.

Mr. Draut testified that a second
major requirement of SB 1 is the development and implementation of new
assessments. The new Kentucky Performance Rating for Educational Progress
system uses criterion- and norm-referenced tests in grades 3 to 8, and
end-of-course and writing assessments in high school. The new assessments,
which include multiple-choice and open-response questions, are benchmarked to
the performance standards; provide longitudinal profiles for students; and are
comparable to national norms. More than 400,000 students were tested in spring 2012.
The new tests will feed into the new accountability system. The new system uses
multiple indicators; is based on continuous improvement; is aligned with
college/career readiness goals; and includes details on academic growth,
achievement gaps, academic progress, college/career readiness, and graduation
rates. Kentucky was one of the first states to be granted flexibility on No
Child Left Behind requirements, which allows Kentucky to have one
accountability model: the Unbridled Learning Accountability System.

Commissioner Holliday described
improvements in Kentucky’s national rankings based on proficiency standards.
The new standards will measure college and career readiness. The percentages of
students who are defined as college and career ready will be lower than the
students who are defined as proficient.

Representative DeCesare asked for an update on the teacher
evaluation system. Commissioner Holliday said that it is anticipated that
results from field testing will be available this year.

Representative DeCesare reported concerns from
superintendents in his district that the state Board of Education is tweaking
SB 1. Commissioner Holliday said that the board has not changed anything
that it was not authorized to change. The board has been driven by a No Child
Left Behind waiver of teacher evaluation. Legislation is needed regarding
measurement of teacher effectiveness. The state board has been active in
implementing kindergarten diagnostic assessments, and 109 districts have
volunteered to participate in the kindergarten readiness screening.

In response to a question from Representative DeCesare,
Commissioner Holliday said that weighting for world languages was changed based
on feedback from superintendents.

In response to a question from Senator Buford, Mr. Draut
said that information could be provided on the percentage of public secondary
school graduates who do not go beyond the first year of college.

Senator Buford suggested a roundtable discussion among the
business community, secondary education, and higher education.

Senator Higdon asked for information on the cost of the
testing system. Mr. Draut said that the end-of-course tests cost $5 million. Testing
for grades 3 to 8 costs $7 million.

In response to a question from Senator Higdon, Commissioner
Holliday said that the P-20 database and Infinite Campus will provide a lot of
interesting information.

CPE President King acknowledged the foresight of the General
Assembly in enacting SB 1. The timing and content gave Kentucky a role in
the development of national core content standards. CPE has worked in
partnership with the Kentucky Department of Education (KDE) and EPSB to
implement the law. SB 1 guided the focus of CPE’s agenda, specifically in two
areas: college readiness and student success. KDE and CPE both use the same
definitions for college readiness and career readiness.

Placement exams and assessments are being aligned across
public postsecondary institutions. A framework of indicators has been completed
that guarantees entry into college credit courses using ACT, SAT, and placement
scores. KDE and CPE are providing placement assessments for students.
Assessment Academies use data to improve student learning through targeted
professional development. President King described several initiatives related
to strengthening the college completion culture including accelerated learning,
summer programming, transitional programs for high school seniors who are not
meeting ACT benchmarks, and an advising toolkit for middle and high school
educators.

Initiatives related to postsecondary professional
development include a website and online modules for faculty who teach freshman
or introductory courses and teacher education faculty; regional workshops and
online webinars; grants for professional development to support implementation
of SB 1; and a national forum in Louisville with postsecondary faculty
from 22 states.

Senator Higdon asked for clarification on realignment
related to use of the ACT. Dr. King said that this will come about through
decisions made by KDE. The grade 11 ACT score is used as a preliminary
indicator for placement. It appears that KDE is moving toward using quality
core specific ACT scores. Mr. Thompson added that the quality core scores are
subject specific and allow for more effective intervention.

Executive Director Rogers presented a timeline of how EPSB
has used policy to improve the practice of teaching since 2004. Elements
include redesign of the internship program to include performance assessments;
revision of EPSB’s goals to indicate commitment to student learning, not just
teaching; redesign of master’s degree programs to focus on leadership; redesign
of principal preparation programs to focus on student-centered school
leadership; redesign of superintendent preparation programs to focus on
student-centered district leadership; restructuring of the requirements for new
teachers; and release of the Data Dashboard, which provides comparisons among
universities in producing educators. Ongoing projects are the redesign of the
state accreditation and program review process and the development of a Quality
Preparation Index, which includes measurement of K-12 student performance.

EPSB officials described the progress that EPSB has made in
implementing four requirements of SB 1. Ms. Nickel said that the first
requirement is that EPSB lead, in collaboration with KDE and CPE, coordinated
information and training sessions on revised content standards. Progress
includes the completion of eight SB 1 information workshops and webinars
and other information workshops and webinars (99.8 percent of faculties at
teacher preparation programs have completed the training). Five online modules
for new faculty have been developed.

Mr. Brown said that the second requirement is that EPSB
ensure that teacher preparation programs include use of academic standards in
the pre-service programs and that all teacher interns have experience planning
classroom instruction based on the revised standards. A committee was appointed
to ensure alignment of SB 1 and the Kentucky Teacher Internship Program.
Dr. Walters-Parker said that for continued accreditation EPSB requires all
teacher preparation programs to document that they are addressing the
requirements of SB 1.

The third requirement is that EPSB collaborate with KDE and
other partners to identify weaknesses in writing instruction and consider how
skills to improve writing should best be taught to teachers. Dr. Walters-Parker
said that two teaching certificate endorsements—literary specialist and
reading—have been added. Revised admission standards and assessment require
composition, not just multiple choice questions. Collaborative
university/college work groups have been established. EPSB and the University
of Kentucky’s Martin School of Public Administration have completed a research
study on the effects of teacher pre-service preparation to teach writing.

The Martin School study has also been useful to EPSB in
implementing its fourth requirement from SB 1: analyze current
requirements at the pre-service level for writing instruction and determine how
writing instruction for prospective teachers can be enhanced or improved. The
writing required for admission is undergoing peer review.

Representative DeCesare asked for elaboration on teacher
preparation related to grammar, spelling, and cursive writing. Dr.
Walters-Parker said that there is renewed emphasis on grammar instruction. Representative
DeCesare said that his children’s school work has not been graded for spelling.
He suggested that spelling should be graded. Dr. Rogers replied that a basic
skills test, which includes writing, is required for admission to the teacher
preparation program. EPSB has adopted a new test for prospective elementary
teachers covering math, language arts, social studies, and science. One has to
pass all areas. Representative DeCesare used an example of math instruction and
lack of training in cursive writing for his children to illustrate how teaching
has changed. Dr. Walters-Parker said that there is a concern about reading
instruction across all subject areas. The issue with cursive writing is not
whether to teach it, but how.

Representative Rand asked for elaboration on why writing is
emphasized. Dr. Walters-Parker said that SB 1 requires emphasis on writing.
There is a practical need for writing to be able to function in the modern
world. Some Kentucky teachers have participated in the National Writing
Project. EPSB wants to replicate some elements of this in its teacher
preparation programs.

Senator Higdon reminded members that the committee’s next
meeting is July 12.